Snape and Harry WAS: Hermione and her parents redux

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 188148


> Alla:
> > 
> > One can of course argue that the very **thought** of supposedly teaching a lesson to the teenager stricken with grief over death of his mentor is abusive, sadistic and totally totally disgusting.
> > 
> > One can also argue that the thought of **punishing** this teenager when he is in such horrible pain is ten times more sadistic.
> 
> Potioncat:
> In this case, does the phrase "teaching a lesson to" mean, instructing or punishing. Because that wording can go either way. I'm just not sure if you're saying that even teaching Harry would be abusive. I would agree if say, after DD had fallen off the tower Professor Snape said, "Get to class, you'll be late."
> 
> But Snape and Harry were in battle, Snape was defending himself while trying to keep his cover, and it was his only opportunity to prepare Harry to face LV.
> 
> Besides, I think Snape was also stricken with grief, and had the extra burdens of not being able to express it, and having caused the death.
>

 Alla:
Well, first of all let me be clear that I wrote the above post based on hypothetical premise that I agree that what Snape was doing is teaching Harry. I really do not accept said premise, but if I were agree with it for the sake of the argument, yes I do think that it was sadistic.

Let me elaborate on both parts. See, after DH revelations I tend to agree with you that Snape likely was in a great deal of pain after killing Dumbledore, since this is not something that he wanted to do. But I do not think that you (hypothetical you) can have it both ways here – either Snape WAS in a great deal of pain and he was in no mood to think of teaching Harry or he was not in any sort of pain and then if he decided to teach Harry something, I thought he really ought to teach Harry something that Harry really needed and without causing him additional pain.

Does that make sense? I tend to believe that Snape was in a pain and he was lashing out at Harry and wanted him to be in pain too, funnily I tend to be more forgiving in this situation, than if what Snape was doing was calculatingly taunting Harry and then cursing him.

And OMG especially if what Carol postulated that Snape was "punishing Harry's insolence and ingratitude", that to me is of course sadistic with capital S. I mean, seriously, if Snape is in a state of mind to be calculating enough to punish Harry for something, surely he would understand that there could be no insolence and ingratitude, because Harry would not know why he is supposed to feel gratitude. Gee, Snape, you killed Dumbledore, thank you so much, you murderer and then you so graciously stopped the curse of another DE because you wanted me to be a present for your Lord. Oh yeah, that is a reason to be grateful, NOT in my mind.

So, if you are interested to know how I would like Snape to behave, if he was somewhat rational and to show that he is not sadistic, I will tell you. :) I would like him to not engage, just block Harry's curses if it is necessary to do so for him to escape, but certainly do not talk to Harry back and most certainly not cursing him back.  And maybe then it will be a lesson for Harry how to do a job one does not want to do and not hurt innocents in progress of it, or something like that.

And of course we all know how much Harry "needed" Occlumency after all, that is not at all, he won based on his ability to love and sacrifice himself for others, not because he could close his mind, that to me also tells that Snape had no clue what Harry needed to be taught.

JMO,

Alla